I'm in deeeeep dilemma, I was a dslr user since 5yrs ago, while Nex launch 2yrs ago I feel like its created to suit me, so I buy a Nex 5 and abandoned my bulky camera in dry box, and after 2yrs I shooted only 2000+ photos with Nex as its bit too bulky as well, and I found that my best camera is my iphone4 and I shooted a lot of photos with it everyday, although the IQ is a so so...
Now, Sony launch rx100, sleek, fit inside my jeans, good IQ, dammit, I'm so tempted, but I'm thinking whether it worth my rm2k+, I afraid I will abandoned it like my Nex... Decision, decision, decision...
I'm in deeeeep dilemma, I was a dslr user since 5yrs ago, while Nex launch 2yrs ago I feel like its created to suit me, so I buy a Nex 5 and abandoned my bulky camera in dry box, and after 2yrs I shooted only 2000+ photos with Nex as its bit too bulky as well, and I found that my best camera is my iphone4 and I shooted a lot of photos with it everyday, although the IQ is a so so...
Now, Sony launch rx100, sleek, fit inside my jeans, good IQ, dammit, I'm so tempted, but I'm thinking whether it worth my rm2k+, I afraid I will abandoned it like my Nex... Decision, decision, decision...
No dilemma. Just buy a RX100 and start shooted again loh....
where can i buy Sony RX100? been waiting for this for quite sometime alrdy
Ready stocks in Sony Centre KLCC.
Added on August 27, 2012, 5:55 pmI went to KLCC to try RX100 out. Brought my XZ-1 along too, to compare the the both as XZ-1 is already very excellent.
I wasn't able to slot in my SD card into the RX100 as the slot was sealed to prevent thief. So was unable to provide some reliable evidence of what I say. But I must say that the sharpness of RX100 produced by the Vario-Sonnar T* is very good.
I used the HX200V beside the RX100 as my subject of testing. After trying both XZ-1 and RX100 in same setting, same aperture to be particular, RX100 appears to be much sharper than the XZ-1. With the same ISO setting, it has lower noise and the colour appears to be quite accurate.
This post has been edited by Ryou: Aug 27 2012, 05:55 PM
Added on August 27, 2012, 5:55 pmI went to KLCC to try RX100 out. Brought my XZ-1 along too, to compare the the both as XZ-1 is already very excellent.
I wasn't able to slot in my SD card into the RX100 as the slot was sealed to prevent thief. So was unable to provide some reliable evidence of what I say. But I must say that the sharpness of RX100 produced by the Vario-Sonnar T* is very good.
I used the HX200V beside the RX100 as my subject of testing. After trying both XZ-1 and RX100 in same setting, same aperture to be particular, RX100 appears to be much sharper than the XZ-1. With the same ISO setting, it has lower noise and the colour appears to be quite accurate.
the LCD on most Sony product produce sharper and crispier image than the original file. What they call their LCD already??? Cant recall the name. But nvm just dont believe in the LCD on the tiny camera.
the LCD on most Sony product produce sharper and crispier image than the original file. What they call their LCD already??? Cant recall the name. But nvm just dont believe in the LCD on the tiny camera.
It's called TruBlack if I recall correctly.
Added on August 27, 2012, 7:21 pm
QUOTE(sniper on the roof @ Aug 27 2012, 05:59 PM)
You compared what was displayed on the LCD alone?
Yes. As I was unable to save it with my card.
But the difference it so significant. There are some details that my XZ-1 was unable to capture. I wouldn't say it's the screen that appears to sharpen it.
This post has been edited by Ryou: Aug 27 2012, 07:21 PM
But the difference it so significant. There are some details that my XZ-1 was unable to capture. I wouldn't say it's the screen that appears to sharpen it.
even if you factor in the blue cast to the images (unless you deal with RAW editing)? i watched some of the comparison video and RX100 making the grey towards blue'ish and is very apparent even onto the video it took, and it was apparent in blunty's video too. if you don't realize the actual scene as seen by the photographer, the output of RX100 alone is very attractive indeed (as you would with other camera as well) but side by side comparison i still see the color cast to it.
to be honest though, after watching a lot of reviews and sample shots and the edited RAW from latest LR4.2 i really started to get convinced even after purchasing the J1. but still, i've yet to be convinced about the white balance issue and to me white balance and color accuracy (as in closer to reality OOC) is top priority.
PS: there's comparison between Leica M9 and the RX100. the RX100 was comparable some shots are pretty much down to personal preference, until you see the 100% crop though.
This post has been edited by little ice: Aug 29 2012, 02:28 AM
even if you factor in the blue cast to the images (unless you deal with RAW editing)? i watched some of the comparison video and RX100 making the grey towards blue'ish and is very apparent even onto the video it took, and it was apparent in blunty's video too. if you don't realize the actual scene as seen by the photographer, the output of RX100 alone is very attractive indeed (as you would with other camera as well) but side by side comparison i still see the color cast to it.
to be honest though, after watching a lot of reviews and sample shots and the edited RAW from latest LR4.2 i really started to get convinced even after purchasing the J1. but still, i've yet to be convinced about the white balance issue and to me white balance and color accuracy (as in closer to reality OOC) is top priority.
PS: there's comparison between Leica M9 and the RX100. the RX100 was comparable some shots are pretty much down to personal preference, until you see the 100% crop though.
QUOTE(alangeorge @ Aug 29 2012, 12:28 PM)
i'll try the RAW/ARW soon since i just found out about the ACR. right now i'm happy with the jpegs.
Read in dpreview that can tune the AWB for warmer tones by putting in more amber. Wonder how's the result.
meanwhile, at dpreview's sony talk forum, many forumers there are pissed off that their camera is only a silver...LOL.
for me, i accept it as a silver. its not perfect but its good enough for me. too bad it came out earlier than lx7 or xz-2. i needed it earlier for a reason, so i'm quite happy with it.
meanwhile, at dpreview's sony talk forum, many forumers there are pissed off that their camera is only a silver...LOL.
for me, i accept it as a silver. its not perfect but its good enough for me. too bad it came out earlier than lx7 or xz-2. i needed it earlier for a reason, so i'm quite happy with it.
Richard Butler also came out to explain that the silver rating is a subjective rating based more on feel.
And of topic for a while since they also discuss this in the forum... I can understand why the XZ-1 is lower number rating but get gold... a lot about the XZ-1 sucked balls but there's always a way around it and at the end, its rewarding as it make the shooter work like dog to get nice pictures.
Aug 24 2012, 11:31 PM
Quote
if you don't realize the actual scene as seen by the photographer, the output of RX100 alone is very attractive indeed (as you would with other camera as well) but side by side comparison i still see the color cast to it.
0.0279sec
0.66
6 queries
GZIP Disabled